Phil Robertson has been kicked off Duck Dynasty indefinitely for speaking out against one of the ruling class’s sacred cows – the homosexual community. To make things worse, he even quoted one of the sources most despised by those who worshiping at the feet of big government – the Bible. It makes no difference to them that our creator made His views perfectly clear in I Corinthians 6:9-10:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

It is common for those who believe in little more than themselves and human wisdom to be critical of the church and Christian teachings. Piers Morgan even had the audacity comment that the anachronistic Catholic Church needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the twenty-first century – as if changing human values should bring about changes in the church’s teaching.

The magnitude of this Obama administration’s “progressive” radicalism becomes more evident with each passing day. In recent months, there has been a drastic spike in acts of both anti-Christian and anti-conservative discrimination and intimidation on military bases across the country. This mounting harassment is not being carried out at the hands of regular enlisted folk but, rather, at the hands of high-ranking officials who, in their official capacity, are targeting Christian and conservative organizations and individuals in an effort to silence them.

It has long been suspected that the Obama administration is using propaganda circulated by the roundly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC, a left-wing extremist group that, in recent years, has adopted two primary goals: 1) raising truckloads of money and 2) smearing as “domestic hate groups” dozens of mainstream Christian ministries like the Family Research Council, or FRC, and the American Family Association, or AFA.

Who would want to help a kid with cancer. Democrat Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid made it clear he wasn’t interested. When asked about the House passed bill that would restore funding to the National Institutes of Health so they could begin accepting cancer patients once again, Reid responded with, “Why would we want to do that?” This is the man who says he is working to provide health care for those who don’t have access. I’m sure the parents of some of the sick children could give him some very good answers.

Then he went on to whine about the more than a thousand workers from Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada who were sitting at home, rather than going to work, because of the government shutdown. One has to wonder if Reid feels that badly about the tens of thousands in his home state, and the millions around the country, that have been sitting at home, unable to find work because of the burden ObamaKare has placed on so many employers.

Sure it is inconvenient for some unionized government workers missing a few days work, but I would remind those having a hissy fit about it, that after the last shutdown, these people received their back pay… and they weren’t even required to work for it. The taxpayers got nothing for their money. The same cannot be said for contractors doing work at government facilities. Unfortunately they are not the subject of the same senatorial concern. These small businesses and individuals are simply out of luck.

The tragedy at the Washington Navy Yard revealed one more failure on the part of those whose job it is to keep the American people safe. It is reported that Aaron Alexis had some pretty bizarre run ins with police and told his counselor that was hearing voices… voices that weren’t there. Those with the information claim to have passed it on to the Navy. Yet, he kept his security clearance and had unfettered access to the base. When we see so much bad news every day, it is beyond understanding that no one did anything about it.

If this were an isolated incident, we might just call it an unfortunate mistake and move on. However, if it is part of a pattern, we would have reason to wonder what it is that is causing multiple failures.

We saw intelligence from the Russians, and others, about the Tsarnaev brothers prior to the Boston Marathon bombing… yet nothing was done to intervene in their nefarious plans. Then we saw “soldier of Allah”, Nadal Hasan, coming to the attention of the Army several times, yet nothing was done to prevent the tragedy at Fort Hood. The Newtown killer was the object of concern, yet again, he was free to kill young children and their teachers.

Well, here we go again: the warmongers in Washington, D.C., are about to attack another Middle Eastern country.

Ben Shapiro summarized the lunacy of Obama’s war with Syria pretty well in a recent Breitbart.com report. The title of the report is: RUSH TO WAR; BOEHNER, PELOSI, CANTOR, BACK OBAMA ON SYRIA. The report begins saying, “In an incredible display of bipartisan blindness, leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties have now declared their support for President Obama’s proposal for action against Syria. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) stated on Tuesday, ‘I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action.’

“House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons ‘cannot be ignored.’ She added, ‘Humanity drew the red line, not President Obama.’ She stated, in a moment of almost unbearable irony, that the UN was acting far too slowly, and should not hold up action. She then invoked the foreign policy wisdom of her 5-year-old grandson to support the potential strike: ‘My five-year-old grandson, as I was leaving San Francisco yesterday, he said to me, Mimi, my name, Mimi, war with Syria, are you yes war with Syria, no, war with Syria. And he’s five years old. We’re not talking about war; we’re talking about action. Yes war with Syria, no with war in Syria. I said, “Well, what do you think?” He said, “I think no war.” I said, “Well, I generally agree with that but you know, they have killed hundreds of children, they’ve killed hundreds of children there.” And he said, five years old, “Were these children in the United States?” And I said, “No, but they’re children wherever they are.”

“House Majority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) also came out in support of Congressional authorization to use force in Syria: ‘I intend to vote to provide the President of the United States the option to use military force in Syria. While the authorizing language will likely change, the underlying reality will not. America has a compelling national security interest to prevent and respond to the use of weapons of mass destruction, especially by a terrorist state such as Syria, and to prevent further instability in a region of vital interest to the United States.’”

My wife was going through some boxes today and came across a well worn, dog eared Gideon Bible. Inside the front cover was the date July 21, 1943. It was given to my father shortly before he boarded the Queen Mary, along with several thousand other GIs to make the hazardous voyage to England. It’s one of the treasures from the past, a connection to a good man who served his country and took good care of his family.

Looking through this artifact of another time made it abundantly clear how much things have changed. However, one of the things that did not change is the work of the Gideons in providing scriptures throughout our nation and throughout the world. This little New Testament literally was through the war. It’s worn appearance and the notes inside showed that it meant a lot to my father as he was thousands of miles from his family and their farm just outside the village Steinsburg, PA.

The Gideons have New Testaments for different groups of people and this particular one was designed for members of the military. On the second page was a message from President Roosevelt:

As Commander-in-Chief I take pleasure in commending the reading of the Bible to all who serve in the armed forces of the United States. Throughout the centuries men of many faiths and diverse origins have found in the Sacred Book words of wisdom, counsel and inspiration. It is a fountain of strength and now, as always an aid in attaining the highest aspirations of the human soul.

On page 261 of The Audacity of Hope, Barack Hussein Obama wrote, “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” Now he appears to be taking one more step to protect the religion of his youth despite the fact that there is absolutely no reason to risk American and take Syrian lives in this troubled area of the world.

We are told that Obama is outraged over the supposed use by the Assad regime of chemical weapons on civilians as he struggles to stay in control of his country. There are two problems with the feeble tantrum coming from the White House.

The first is that there are mixed reports coming out of Syria. Many of them say that chemical weapons were used, but that it was the rebels who gassed the people… many of them children. While succumbing to a poisonous gas attack is far from pleasant, dying from the more conventional methods is no picnic either. The dictator has been killing people for years, and they are just as dead as as those who have been gassed.

Some commentators are running around, flapping their wings and gums about how the collection of Verizon phone records is casting an overly broad net trying to catch a small number of radical Muslim terrorists. The facts, if we ever really get to them, is that Verizon is not alone, and that pretty much all carriers, as well as internet providers are being forced to surrender personal information. Even some Republican members of congress are speaking warmly about this supposed effort to keep our citizens safe.

All this would be good if one were to truly believe that the Obama administration was actually interested in protecting us from Islamic attacks. That is, do could we really accept that this regime heavily populated by Muslims, and approved of by CAIR, would break the President’s pledge to “stand with the Muslims” if things should turn against them.

We need look no further than several recent events to get a pretty good idea of why this information is collected and mined. Most recently, Barack Hussein Obama declared that the war on terror was over… there was not more conflict. He seems to have forgotten that just a few weeks ago, some Islamic terrorists blew up Americans at the Boston Marathon. He also seems to have forgotten that a few months ago, Muslim attackers killed an American ambassador and three others trying to defend the consulate. He also seems to have forgotten that his administration ignored repeated warnings from Russia that the marathon bombers were among us and a danger to our country.

Encouragement from Congressman Randy Forbes (VA-4) – one of the unsung good guys.

BIVOUAC OF THE DEAD

By Theodore O’Hara

(Written in memory of the Kentucky troops killed in the Mexican War – 1847)

Portions Of This Haunting Poem Are Inscribed On Placards Throughout Arlington, As Well as On The McClellan Gate There

The muffled drum’s sad roll has beat
The soldier’s last tattoo;
No more on Life’s parade shall meet
That brave and fallen few.
On fame’s eternal camping ground
Their silent tents to spread,
And glory guards, with solemn round
The bivouac of the dead.

There have been cries for US involvement to do something as Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad crossed some sort of imaginary “red line” by using chemical weapons on his own people. Now, it is generally understood that al-Assad is a bad dude. So for the low information citizens, it may be a logical assumption that the US needs to do something about it. The problem is that there is much that is not understood by the bleeding hearts and the “neocons”.

The first problem is that the proposed solution is to put more American soldiers in harms way to protect the lives of these rebel “freedom fighters”. Given our financial situation, the fact that our military finds itself stretched thin in far too many country’s and conflicts around the world, and the far too frequent use of “reserves”. This is endangering the effectiveness of this finest force in the world.

Those promoting involvement do not take into account the far greater cost in military personnel. Are we really ready to sacrifice more of of fine young men and women to put this mad man into exile or in the ground? Adding to this cost are the number of children growing up without a parent or a young wives without their husbands? One has to wonder where the anti-war protesters from W’s presidency or from the 60s have gone to. They seem to have evaporated since the Democrats have seized control of the White House.

There is a line from the movie Tombstone (one of my favorite westerns, by the way) in which Val Kilmer’s character, Doc Holliday, says to Wyatt Earp, “My hypocrisy knows no bounds.” (For the record, Kilmer should have won an Oscar for his performance of Doc Holliday in that movie.) Well, my friends, what Doc Holliday said in Tombstone could be said by virtually every prominent gun grabber in the country, because they are the biggest hypocrites the world has ever seen!

Paul Joseph Watson wrote a very enlightening report relative to the way that proponents of gun control are themselves heavily protected BY GUNS. Watson writes:

“The fact that Senator Dianne Feinstein’s gun control bill exempts government officials from the planned semi-auto assault weapons ban illustrates the astounding hypocrisy of gun control advocates who, while working feverishly to disarm the American people, own firearms and surround themselves with armed men.

“As the Washington Times reported last week, ‘Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and WEAPONS USED BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.’ (Emphasis in original)

On August 7, 2012, The Washington Times ran an editorial entitled, “The Civil War of 2016.” It begins, “Imagine Tea Party extremists seizing control of a South Carolina town and the Army being sent in to crush the rebellion. This farcical vision is now part of the discussion in professional military circles.

“At issue is an article in the respected Small Wars Journal titled ‘Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future.’ It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army’s University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an ‘extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement’ seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, ‘occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.’ The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It’s a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.

“The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that ‘once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.’ They claim that ‘the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,’ not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy.”

An impotent general and Defense Secretary Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee that consent of congress is no longer relevant in the deployment of US soldiers in foreign lands. The two showed a greater concern for the opinion of the international community than the permission of the legislative body designated by the Constitution to handle such matters.

As you watch the video, particularly Panetta’s testimony and Senator Sessions incredulous response, it is frightening to think that he and his fellow internationalist boss are the ones sending our fighting men and women into harms way based on the whims of an international community that does not really have the best interests of our country at heart.

[While the editor may not endorsed all the conclusions, this article has some important information for the American people.]

In a recent column posted on LewRockwell.com, Judge Andrew Napolitano highlighted a recent New York Times investigative report that reveals how President Barack Obama is engaging in secret assassinations worldwide. Judge Napolitano begins, “The leader of the government regularly sits down with his senior generals and spies and advisers and reviews a list of the people they want him to authorize their agents to kill. They do this every Tuesday morning when the leader is in town. The leader once condemned any practice even close to this, but now relishes the killing because he has convinced himself that it is a sane and sterile way to keep his country safe and himself in power. The leader, who is running for re-election, even invited his campaign manager to join the group that decides whom to kill.

“This is not from a work of fiction, and it is not describing a series of events in the Kremlin or Beijing or Pyongyang. It is a fair summary of a 6,000-word investigative report in The New York Times earlier this week about the White House of Barack Obama. Two Times journalists, Jo Becker and Scott Shane, painstakingly and chillingly reported that the former lecturer in constitutional law and liberal senator who railed against torture and Gitmo now weekly reviews a secret kill list, personally decides who should be killed and then dispatches killers all over the world–and some of his killers have killed Americans.

“We have known for some time that President Obama is waging a private war. By that I mean he is using the CIA on his own–and not the military after congressional authorization–to fire drones at thousands of persons in foreign lands, usually while they are riding in a car or a truck. He has done this both with the consent and over the objection of the governments of the countries in which he has killed. He doesn’t want to talk about this, but he doesn’t deny it. How chilling is it that David Axelrod–the president’s campaign manager–has periodically seen the secret kill list? Might this be to keep the killings politically correct?”

As we approach Monday’s Memorial Day Holiday, Rabbi Eckstein talks about a day of remembrance for those who have lost their lives defending our freedoms that so many of us love. He compares it to other remembrances that help shape what we do and who we are. In any case, we cannot forget that like Easter is more than just a bunny, Memorial Day is more than barbeque.

After flying half way around the world to make a campaign speech with soldiers and military equipment as props Barack Hussein Obama got his answer within hours. After spending untold dollars, and, more importantly, American lives the President agreed that the Taliban should have a part in the future of Afghanistan. These were the people we were supposed to be driving from power in retaliation for their support of the 911 attackers.

Now, after all this adventure has cost the United States, and we have installed a corrupt and unreliable leader in the land, it’s as if he is saying “Never mind”. We could have achieved this same result years ago! Our country fell into the same “no win” strategy that it followed in the poisonous 60s and 70s. The best of America’s youth were sacrificed for internationalist political agenda where victory was never a consideration.

World War II ended when our enemies were no longer able to wage war. They surrendered and it was over. Modern internationalist diplomacy revolves around negotiated settlements where both sides agree to stop fighting, even though they still have the ability. This reduces treaties to agreements to suspend hostilities until it becomes more convenient to start them again.

The Alleged Danger From the Powers of the Union to the State Governments Considered

For the Independent Journal.

Author: James Madison

[As we read the words of James Madison, it is difficult not to consider how far we have strayed from the concepts our founder hand down to us.]

To the People of the State of New York:

HAVING shown that no one of the powers transferred to the federal government is unnecessary or improper, the next question to be considered is, whether the whole mass of them will be dangerous to the portion of authority left in the several States. The adversaries to the plan of the convention, instead of considering in the first place what degree of power was absolutely necessary for the purposes of the federal government, have exhausted themselves in a secondary inquiry into the possible consequences of the proposed degree of power to the governments of the particular States. But if the Union, as has been shown, be essential to the security of the people of America against foreign danger; if it be essential to their security against contentions and wars among the different States; if it be essential to guard them against those violent and oppressive factions which embitter the blessings of liberty, and against those military establishments which must gradually poison its very fountain; if, in a word, the Union be essential to the happiness of the people of America, is it not preposterous, to urge as an objection to a government, without which the objects of the Union cannot be attained, that such a government may derogate from the importance of the governments of the individual States? Was, then, the American Revolution effected, was the American Confederacy formed, was the precious blood of thousands spilt, and the hard-earned substance of millions lavished, not that the people of America should enjoy peace, liberty, and safety, but that the government of the individual States, that particular municipal establishments, might enjoy a certain extent of power, and be arrayed with certain dignities and attributes of sovereignty? We have heard of the impious doctrine in the Old World, that the people were made for kings, not kings for the people. Is the same doctrine to be revived in the New, in another shape that the solid happiness of the people is to be sacrificed to the views of political institutions of a different form? It is too early for politicians to presume on our forgetting that the public good, the real welfare of the great body of the people, is the supreme object to be pursued; and that no form of government whatever has any other value than as it may be fitted for the attainment of this object. Were the plan of the convention adverse to the public happiness, my voice would be, Reject the plan. Were the Union itself inconsistent with the public happiness, it would be, Abolish the Union. In like manner, as far as the sovereignty of the States cannot be reconciled to the happiness of the people, the voice of every good citizen must be,

After returning to his Israel home from a brief trip to Obama’s fantasy world, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told parliament that Iran is behind the recent rocket attacks on his country. He explained that the militants in Gaza were armed and trained by the Iranians, and that his country would do whatever was necessary to protect his people.

He went on to consider the possibility Iran was close to developing nuclear weapons… which is most distressing to those Iran’s demented President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has pledged to wipe from the face of the earth. While for those of us in the United States, it’s somewhat academic, to the Israels it is a deadly serious threat to their survival – one that cannot be ignored.

It is not clear whether such weapons are ready to be hurled at the Jewish nation, or if they will be in the near future. It is also not clear to this writer what the best course of action would be for this tiny coastal nation. What is clear is that, despite official pronouncements to the contrary, Israel cannot depend on the support of the United States government. Netanyahu remarked, “Israel has never left its fate to others, not even the best of its friends.” And right now, the US is not looking like the best of friends to the country.

March 6 marks the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo back in 1836. For more than 13 days, 186 brave and determined patriots withstood Santa Anna’s seasoned army of over 4,000 troops. To a man, the defenders of that mission fort knew they would never leave those ramparts alive. They had several opportunities to leave and live. Yet, they chose to fight and die. How foolish they must look to this generation of spoiled Americans.

It is difficult to recall that stouthearted men such as Davy Crockett (a nationally known frontiersman and former congressman), Will Travis (only 23 years old with a little baby at home), and Jim Bowie (a wealthy landowner with properties on both sides of the Rio Grande) really existed. These were real men with real dreams and real desires. Real blood flowed through their veins. They loved their families and enjoyed life as much as any of us do. There was something different about them, however. They possessed a commitment to liberty that transcended personal safety and comfort.

Liberty is an easy word to say, but it is a hard word to live up to. Freedom has little to do with financial gain or personal pleasure. Accompanying Freedom is her constant and unattractive companion, Responsibility. Neither is she an only child. Patriotism and Morality are her sisters. They are inseparable: destroy one and all will die.

While most Americans were celebrating the holidays, President Barack Obama quietly signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), otherwise known as the “Indefinite Detention Act,” into law. Obama had initially said he would veto the bill which contains the draconian language authorizing the US military to seize and incarcerate US citizens without warrant, due process, trial, etc. Of course, Obama quickly changed his mind after the bill passed both houses of Congress.

When signing the NDAA into law, Obama issued a signing statement that in essence said, “I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t.” See this report.

Americans should realize that, coupled with the Patriot Act, the NDAA, for all intents and purposes, completely nullifies a good portion of the Bill of Rights, turns the United States into a war zone, and places US citizens under military rule. And what is even more astonishing is the manner in which the national press corps, and even the so-called “conservative” talking heads, have either completely ignored it, or have actually defended it. The likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al., should be ashamed of themselves!

It is well documented that many of America’s Founding Fathers had a very real and deep-seated distrust of standing armies–and for good reason. They had just fought a costly and bloody war for independence, which had been largely predicated upon the propensities for the abuse and misuse of individual liberties by a pervasive and powerful standing army (belonging to Great Britain) amongst them. Listen to Thomas Jefferson: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” Note that Jefferson identified both banking institutions and standing armies as being “dangerous to our liberties.” James Madison said, “A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen.” Elbridge Gerry (Vice President under James Madison) called standing armies “the bane of liberty.”

For the most part, the sentiments of our founders ring hollow to modern Americans who, ever since World War II, have glorified, idolized, and practically even worshipped the standing US military. But of course, with only isolated instances (which were almost always completely covered up by the mainstream news media) of the abuse of military power being committed against US citizens, the American people, as a whole, have no point of reference directing them to the sagacity of America’s founders on the subject. Indeed, who could even imagine that US military forces would ever be used against the US citizenry? After all, the media did a masterful job of covering up the most flagrant example of US military forces being used against US citizens when US military forces assisted federal law enforcement agencies in slaughtering the Branch Davidians outside Waco, Texas, on April 19, 1993. So, most Americans simply shut their eyes against that “painful truth” and chose to ignore the fact that it even happened.

Yes, there have been isolated instances of military personnel abusing their authority against American citizens (i.e., Waco in 1993, Kent State University in 1970), but overall the founders’ deep-seated distrust of standing armies has been replaced with deep-seated trust. But were our founders right to be distrusting of standing armies? And are we wrong to be so trusting of standing armies? Consider the following report by Dr. Andrew Bosworth.

In 1836, former frontiersman and congressman Davy Crockett led a band of volunteers all the way from their home State of Tennessee to San Antonio, Texas, in order to join up with William Travis and his small company of soldiers, and help defend the Alamo–and Texas independence–from Mexican General Santa Anna and his army of over 5,000 seasoned troops. To men such as Crockett, Travis, Jim Bowie, and the rest, State independence and freedom was worth fighting and dying for. To a man, they each proved that. Therefore, it is fitting to wonder what Davy Crockett would think about his home State of Tennessee joining with federal agencies in establishing random checkpoints throughout the Volunteer State.

According to a local Tennessee news source, “You’re probably used to seeing TSA’s signature blue uniforms at the airport, but now agents are hitting the interstates to fight terrorism with Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR).

“‘Where is a terrorist more apt to be found? Not these days on an airplane more likely on the interstate,’ said Tennessee Department of Safety & Homeland Security Commissioner Bill Gibbons.

“Tuesday Tennessee was first to deploy VIPR simultaneously at five weigh stations and two bus stations across the state.”

[As he left public life, George Washington had serious concerns for the country he helped bring into being. He had surprising insights into the situations this new nation would face and (often ignored) advice on avoiding pitfalls that have destroyed other nations in the past. The language is difficult to comprehend at times, but we can learn from his wisdom or we can continue to ignore it at our peril.]

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

[As he left public life, George Washington had serious concerns for the country he helped bring into being. He had surprising insights into the situations this new nation would face and (often ignored) advice on avoiding pitfalls that have destroyed other nations in the past. The language is difficult to comprehend at times, but we can learn from his wisdom or we can continue to ignore it at our peril.]

Friends and Citizens:

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

[I received this from Congressman Randy Forbes (VA-4) and this information comes straight from the Armed Services Committee. It is a short piece but it summarizes where our military is today versus twenty years ago. This is important in view of the fact that the big government types are looking to chop even more from the defense budget to keep funds available for all the social and regulatory programs so dear to their heart.]

by Congressman Randy Forbes

Military leaders have described U.S. forces as on the “ragged edge.” What does this mean? Let’s take a look:

The United States has a shrinking force. In 1990, the U.S. had a 546-ship Navy; today we have 288. The U.S. had 76 Army brigades in 1990; today we have 45. Two decades ago, the Air Force had twice as many fighter squadrons and bombers as today.

[Editors note: so many people want to get their face time as the public turns its attention to the tenth anniversary of the September 11th tragedy. Congressman Forbes is not one of them. He is the real deal, one of he good guys in congress who voted against every single bailout and stood up for America at every opportunity.]

It is ten years later. Most of us remember where we were. We remember who we were with. We remember the phone calls we made, desperate to hear the sounds of our loved ones’ voices, to know they were OK. We remember the images of the twin towers crashing to the ground, the thick, gray ash that covered the New York City streets, the papers that littered the sidewalks, and the panic that followed. We remember the eery, weighty silence that swept the country in the days that followed. The images are burned into our minds.

Over the course of ten years since September 11, 2001, our nation has collectively gone through stages of grief: shock and denial that such a horrific act could have occurred. Anger at those who sought to take the lives of thousands of innocent people. Deep sadness over the senseless loss of lives and reflection as we try desperately to understand. Read more of this article »

If you have not made your vacation plans and live within a few hundred miles of Williamsburg VA, or if you happen to crave TSA molestation, now might be a good time to check out the walk back in time at early capitol of Viginia. You can travel down the same streets that Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson walked. You may even run into President Washington or Marquis de Lafayette. The children, even those in their 60s will find the early craftsmen fascinating as they explain how created the necessities of life in the eighteenth century with simple tools and a little ingenuity.

However, it would be best study your history before treading these hallowed streets. The physical plant is superb, but the funding for much of the work came from the John D Rockefeller family that did not exactly have the founders passion for freedom of the masses. Then there is the proximity to William and Mary, a liberal arts university with the emphasis on liberal.

This was amply illustrated during a presentation that was billed as an example of the influence of the clergy on the war for independence. We were treated to a re-enactment of a sermon by John Camm, the colleges’ president from 1771 to 1776. Instead of hearing the stirring rhetoric of patriots like John Witherspoon or John Peter Muhlenberg, we heard the words of a loyalist promoting the divine right of kings along with the concept that not all men were created equal – that some were meant to have a station in life above others to insure a smoothly functioning society. It is much the same struggle we have today. Read more of this article »

Bivouac Of The Dead

(Written in memory of the Kentucky troops killed in the Mexican War – 1847)

Portions Of This Haunting Poem Are Inscribed On Placards Throughout Arlington, As Well as On The McClellan Gate There

The muffled drum’s sad roll has beat
The soldier’s last tattoo;
No more on Life’s parade shall meet
That brave and fallen few.
On fame’s eternal camping ground
Their silent tents to spread,
And glory guards, with solemn round
The bivouac of the dead.

Even Barack Obama has come to realize the impossibility of Israel accepting his decree to return to the 1967 borders. Had he considered the proposal before reading it from the teleprompter, it is doubtful the words would have crossed his lips. Unfortunately our public schools have produced several generations of geographically illiterate citizens who don’t know Jerusalem from Jersey City or Jamaica. Because of this, many Americans don’t comprehend why this proposal is such a problem.

Israel has universal service in the IDF, and I’m not sure I would be in favor of in our country, but I must say that most of our young soldiers I come in contact with are polite, intelligent and a credit to our country as well as their uniform. Simply adding an ROTC course or two to high school curricula would help people understand that, among other things, an adequate defense involves more than simply having expensive, high-tech weapons. The public would understand that there is geographic component. Read more of this article »

Invitation

If you like the copyrighted content of Political Christian and would like to repost, republish or email the material, permission is granted for any article attributed to Larry Miller provided 1) there is a link back to this site and 2) there is no subscription fee and no paid advertising.

For other circumstances and other contributors, please contact larry@politicachristian.org or follow links that may be provided.